Attorney General's office asks Vermont committee for 18 months to complete S.69 rulemaking; panel considers Jan. 1, 2027 effective date

The Vermont House Committee on Commerce and Economic Development heard testimony May 21 about the timetable for rulemaking under S.69, with the Attorney General's Office asking the committee to give the office at least 18 months to write implementing rules and the panel discussing a Jan. 1, 2027 effective date for the law and related rules.

Todd Dalos, attorney with the Vermont Attorney General's Office, told the committee the office has been granted rulemaking in three discrete areas under the bill and that complex rulemaking takes time. "Two years seems an appropriate amount of time," Dalos said, while later asking the committee to consider at least 18 months for the Attorney General's Office to complete the process. He cited a prior AGO rulemaking that was completed in about a year as "a pretty aggressive rulemaking timeline" and warned that shorter timelines can be difficult to meet.

The committee explored how the statute and rules interact and how businesses will know what to do if the law becomes effective before rules are finalized. Dalos emphasized the primacy of the statute, saying the rules "can't materially deviate from the requirements of the law," and described the Vermont Administrative Procedures Act process, which includes required public engagement and review by the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules. He added that the AGO typically seeks industry input and pursues education-first approaches to enforcement when businesses are caught off guard.

Legislative Council staff and committee members discussed concrete calendar options. The bill then on the table had an effective date of July 1, 2026; committee staff proposed instead aligning the act and the rules to an effective date of Jan. 1, 2027. The committee also discussed adding a Jan. 1, 2027 deadline for an age-assurance rule and assigning that same date to a design and data-privacy rulemaking that previously had no deadline. One proposal would give the Attorney General's Office rulemaking authority beginning July 1, 2025, with draft rules due by Jan. 1, 2027.

Members acknowledged potential litigation risk connected to the bill and referenced a recent decision in California that the bill aims to address. No formal vote occurred at the hearing; committee members said S.69 would be up for action later in the week during scheduled floor consideration. Committee members also discussed next steps for reconciliation with other pending bills and for sending appropriation language to the relevant committee.

The discussion kept several threads separate: (1) discussion of reasonable timelines and the need for industry engagement to ensure feasible rules, (2) directions about specific draft dates the committee could add to the bill language, and (3) the lack of a formal action at the May 21 hearing. Dalos repeatedly framed rulemaking as a balancing exercise between protecting legislative goals and avoiding rules that are impossible or unduly burdensome for businesses.

The committee did not adopt final language during the hearing. Members said they would try to finalize changes quickly so the bill could be filed for floor action on the upcoming Friday and Tuesday sessions.